Brooklyn Tea Party on Fox Business Channel

        This evening at 8 pm and 11 pm, I, John Press of the Infidel Bloggers ALliance, will be on Fox Business' Money Rocks with Eric Bolling representing the Brooklyn Tea Party!  
         Unfortunately, I did not have the opportunity to discuss culturist issues such as the mosque and Arizona's immigration laws.
       If you get Fox Business, tune in. 
       By the way, the GOP came up with a conservative economic pledge today.  The Tea Party is having an impact!
       www.culturism.us

The Brooklyn Tea Party Rallies !!

The Brooklyn TEA Party rallied this last Sunday.  Here is some coverage.  

         Two corrections!  Though at Kosher Hut, we meet in Gravesend, not Midwood at 2 pm each Sunday.  Also, I count more than 40 assembled and we kept the numbers fluctuating like this for over three hours!  

           Regardless, it is a very pretty picture.

          The whole, article with expandable photos, can be found by clicking HERE !

NEW YORK AREA FOLK COME ON !!!!

JOIN THE BROOLYN TEA PARTY RALLY !!

THIS SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 19^TH, 3PM – 6 PM

69^th STREET PIER

TAKE THE R TRAIN TO the BAY RIDGE AVE - 68^th St Stop

Walk down Bay Ridge Ave to get there

Hear Candidates Who Pledge To:

1.           Fight for a Balanced Budget Amendment, Freeze Spending and Hiring, and Overturn ObamaCare.

2.           Fight the Ground Zero Mosque

3.           Support Arizona’s Immigration Law.

                                      - Speakers Include –

- Dan Halloran - member of the New York City Council, 19th District

- Betsy McCaughey – Lieutenant Governor of New York (1995 – 1998)

- Roger Blank – Candidate for the House of Representative in the 14^th District against Carolyn Maloney

- Andrew Sullivan - Fox and Friends Guest, Ground Zero Rally Speaker and Blue Collar Corner Blogger

- Susan Kone- Candidate for the House of Representatives in the 8th District against Jerry Nadler

- Frank Santarpia - President of the Staten Island Tea Party

- Satya Dosapai -  Human Rights Watch

- Bob Turner -Candidate for the House of Representatives in the 9th District against Anthony Weiner

- John Press – President of the Brooklyn Tea Party, author of the book Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future

AND JOIN THE BROOKLYN TEA PARTY

We meet at 2 pm every Sunday at Kosher Hut at 709 King’s Hwy

Join our Brooklyn Tea Party Group Facebook Community with the above logo

Muslim Wants Culturist Discrimination Against Muslims in the U.S. Military

Through a wave of conflicting and ironic multicultural platitudes, Private First Class Nasser Abdo has made the case for, at very least, discriminating against Muslims in the military.  Abdo joined the military in April of 2009.  Since then, he has filed for conscientious objector status because, he says, one cannot be true to their Muslim faith and fight for the U.S. in Afghanistan.  He is right.  Private Abdo’s case perfectly illustrates why the military must drop multiculturalism and employ discrimination.[i]

Abdo’s multicultural hypocrisy is common when he claims that he was irrationally discriminated against while simultaneously asking for special treatment because his cultural differences are so significant that we should pay attention to them. When facing any discrimination, after calling you racist, multiculturalists claim that culture provides no rational basis for discrimination.  Multiculturalists, you see, do not really take culture seriously.  But, they then turn around and tell you that culture is very important when they want special treatment.[ii] 

Either we should take culture seriously or we should not take culture seriously.  Aldo makes a powerful case for discrimination when he tells the media that fighting in the US military runs counter to his “maintaining his Islamic faith.”[iii]

Of course, I do not hold out much faith that we’ll learn Abdo’s lesson.  Even after US Army Majory Nidal Hassan killed 13 people on a military base in the name of Islam, the military continues to enroll Muslim into its ranks. That is because politically correct multicultural thinking forbids all historical and logical thought that question its precepts by calling such thought intolerant, racist, and discriminatory.[iv]

Abdo showed just how completely multiculturalism has destroyed our ability to think when no one laughed at the obvious falsehood of his statement that, “Islam does not allow me to operate in any kind of warfare.”[v] In no forum has he been asked about the concept of Jihad.  Even Fox News blithely avoided editorial commentary on his quote that “"Islam is a peaceful religion, it's not a religion of warfare." And so, multicultural logic dictates that 1400 years of Islamic military expansion from Spain to India to 9 – 11 must be ignored to further the idea that all cultures adhere to the same values.[vi]

If we have any hope for learning about cultural diversity, it will have to come from Islamic media.  All non-Western nations assume a culturist, rather than a multiculturalist, perspective. They routinely take their culture’s side in textbooks, international diplomacy and, even, television.  While Aldo claimed that universal culture-neutral precepts embodied in Islam prevented him from being violent in our media, he told Al-Jazeera he wanted out of the US military because Islam told him he was, “forbidden to kill Muslims.”  The implication, of course, is that he could kill non-Muslims. [vii]

Wanting it both ways, again, multiculturalists often take the globalist tact of invoking the “world community.”  Abdo advocated stopping war in the Middle East by “coming together as a community and portraying Islam as the peaceful religion that it is.”  In this explanation he calls the Islamic community his community.  But immediately after he claimed we need “a spiritual approach, the community approach, the diplomatic approach” for peace in the Middle East.  Herein the world community has no sides.  Again, with multiculturalists and their globalist brethren, in one sentence culture exists and the next minute it melts away.  

Notwithstanding Abdo’s historical and cultural ignorance, the military must assume that the very fact of War negates the ideal of the “world community.”  The military, by its very nature, cannot entertain such multicultural pap.[viii]

When Private Abdo told his people via Al-Jazeera television, “I Don’t believe I can involve myself in an army that wages war against Muslims” he provided a slew of valuable culturist lessons. Cultural identity is important and conflict between civilizations persists.  This statement also gives lie to multiculturalists’ universal “global community” sentiment.  And, since the West’s wars will likely be against Muslims for the foreseeable future, Aldo’s honest and truthful estimation of the influence of culture on the individual provides adequate justification for keeping Muslims out of our military.[ix]  

For good measure, Abdo complained that in the military, “There were racial slurs.”  Well the obvious fact of the matter is that there were no racial slurs.  Abdo is white.  If there were slurs they were about his religion.  And religions are not races.  We can clear up this dangerous conflation by using the word “culturist.”  The slurs referred to his culture, not his race.  We should thank Abdo because he has not only shown us the irony in multiculturalists not wanting to consider culture unless they want special treatment, he has shown us how spurious their charges of racism are.

As a culturist, I concur with Private Aldo.  He and the Islamic Fort Hood massacre demonstrate that Muslims should not be in our military.  But to make this a policy, the military must drop multiculturalism’s blindness to culture in favor of culturism.  As its very reason is fighting conflicts between civilizations, the U.S. military cannot safely entertain the multicultural platitudes that have crippled civilian discussion and reasoning.  The military must separate irrational racism from rational culturism. Private Aldo declared that he could not, “Serve both the US Army and his God simultaneously.”  We must listen to Private Aldo.[x]  

John K. Press, Ph.D. is the author of the Book, “Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future.”  www.culturism.us has more information about culturism.

---

[i] Free Nassar Abdo Website,  http://www.freenasserabdo.org/

[ii] The Atlantic Journal, History Repeats in Anti-Islamic Mood, http://www.ajc.com/opinion/history-repeats-in-anti-605758.html

[iii] CNN Interview, http://www.freenasserabdo.org/2010/08/cnn-interview.html

[iv] Wikipedia, Fort Hood Shooting, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hood_shooting

[v] CNN Interview, http://www.freenasserabdo.org/2010/08/cnn-interview.html

[vi] Fox News, U.S. Soldier, Citing His Muslim Religion, Seeks Conscientious Objector Status, Joshua Rhettt Miller, Sept, 02, 2010, http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/02/muslim-soldier-refuses-deploy-afghanistan/

[vii] The Middle East Media Research Institute, August 21, 2010, http://www.memri.org/clip_transcript/en/2594.htm

[viii] Interview with KPFA’s Aimee Allison, http://www.freenasserabdo.org/2010/09/interview-with-kpfas-aimee-allison.html

[ix] The Middle East Media Research Institute, August 21, 2010, http://www.memri.org/clip_transcript/en/2594.htm

[x] CNN Interview, http://www.freenasserabdo.org/2010/08/cnn-interview.html

The Culturist Foreign Agents Registration Act and the Ground Zero Mosque

Culturist Media Strategy Debate and The Ground Zero Mosque

Hey Guys, Its been a million years since I put out a video with me talking.  I'm baaaack! 



http://www.culturism.us/

Our Hearing to Stop the 9 - 11 Mosque

www.culturism.us

DIVISION WITHIN THE TEA PARTY ??!!

Acrimony within the Tea Party and important issues came from an article profiling me in the NYC Daily News. While the Daily News reporter originally contacted me due to my being the President of the Brooklyn Tea Party, the conversation quickly swung to my political passion: culturism. In this context we also discussed the Brooklyn Tea Party’s rally to stop the mosque at Ground Zero of the 9 – 11 attacks. The article appeared within the context of a large story about the variety of folks in the Tea Party.


When I went to another Tea Party Chapter meeting to network and see how they run their meetings, the flack began. “That F’in idiot John Press” one member was exclaiming loudly in conversation when I entered the meeting. Shocked because I thought I had brought some good publicity to the Tea Party! When I finally calmed the movement leader down, I found he had some valid and interesting reasons to criticize me.

Many members have worked very hard to make the “Tea Party brand.” Being smeared as racists (the leaders who chastised me was black), fringe truthers concerned with Obama’s birth certificate, and dangerous militia folk, made people skittish about joining the Tea Party. Party strategists have, therefore, worked to make Tea Party membership only indicate a devotion to fiscal conservativism and upset over our nation's out-of-control borrowing. Eventually, we may be able to diversify into other areas of concern, the Chapter President explained, but to continue in a growth mode, making people think the Tea Party denounces Mosques scrambles the message and makes folks skittish about joining. Many national leaders believe we should never deviate from our main point.

Though he has valid points several responses come to mind. First of all, while it may not play strongly nationally, in Brooklyn people are hot under the collar over this mosque. And a large coalition already exists to stop another one being built in Brooklyn. Our ultimate local aim is to elect legitimately conservative candidates. Certain parts of Brooklyn have large pools of underrepresented and abused conservative citizens who would get active for legit candidates. And, if we wish to find legit candidates, an even stronger litmus test than whether or not they will go on record as favoring not overspending, is whether or not they will go on record opposing a mosque at ground zero and in Brooklyn. We will accrue passionate activists as well as politicians with integrity if we make stopping the mosque one of our areas of focus.

I wrote a policy paper about immigration being a Tea Party issue. Illegal immigration costs our states billions per year. Among other things, immigration is a fiscal issue. Can't immigration be a Tea Party issue?  And what about foreign policy?  I wrote another policy paper about the Tea Party using culturism to mediate the isolationism of Ron Paul and the expansionist view of Sarah Palin. Both claim Tea Party credibility despite their divergent stances. Culturism argues that we take cultural diversity seriously. Culturists agree with Ron Paul about avoiding nation building. But we culturists do so because cultural diversity dooms such efforts. So we agree with Palin that we must recognize our cultural enemies. Culturism argues that we strike our enemies hard, if we must, but then return home. The immigration issue and the culturist stance of avoiding nation building both seem intimately connected with the Tea Party message of smaller government and saving money. Are we not allowed to discuss such issues?

I asked the hostile Tea Party leader if he’d back an open-borders, pro-mosque, fiscal conservative. Having ample experience in politics, he gave me a great answer. He told me of a time where he had worked alongside an avowed socialist on the issue of driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. Politics make strange bedfellows. In the case of backing a candidate with whom many of us would disagree, he said we should never endorse candidates as such, we should endorse their economic policy. I told my disagreeing comrade that I thought that we would get more growth by taking a stance with Arizona than ignoring it. He disagreed. When I told him I thought we would soon need to choose to either side with Palin and her expansionist policies or Paul’s isolationist stance, he agreed. But, he added, the time for that decision had not yet come. To grow the movement to where it will have an impact we need numbers and that means we must stay on message.

I will bring this debate to the next Brooklyn Tea Party meeting. We will need to decide whether we entirely drop the mosque and immigration issues and just stick with the core theme of fiscal conservatism or not. I will add an argument my erstwhile compatriot did not add. As a new chapter, taking a brand others have crafted and bending it to your will is rude. If you, the reader, have any additional pertinent insights for me to bring to my chapter, please leave a comment and I will do so. 
www.culturism.us

STOP THE GROUND ZERO MOSQUE WITH FARA AND CULTURISM

We can stop the mosque at Ground Zero if we exchange the multicultural point of view for a culturist point of view and prosecute the mosque’s primary backer, Imam Rauf, under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). 

                  Passed in 1938, FARA initially focused on “subversive” political propaganda.[i] The purpose of FARA is to insure that the U.S. Government and the people of the United States are informed of the source of information (propaganda) and the identity of persons attempting to influence U.S. public opinion, policy, and laws.[ii] Upon registering as a foreign agent, the public has access to the foreign agent’s records concerning the publicity campaigns, lobbying expenditures, funding flows, offices activities and disbursements in support of those activities.[iii] In addition, the Act also requires that informational materials (formerly called propaganda) be labeled with a conspicuous statement that the information is disseminated by the agents on behalf of the foreign principal.[iv]

The act was passed in response to German propaganda in the lead-up to World War II. Unfortunately, persons whose activities are of a purely commercial nature or solely of a religious, scholastic, academic, scientific or fine arts nature are exempt.[v]  CAIR Unmasked, an organization dedicated to getting the Council of American – Islamic Relations, registered as a foreign agent, does not think religious status excuses Islamic organizations from compliance with FARA.[vi] 

The problematic distinction between religious and political activities in our law stems from our confusing our culture with supposed global culture.  We assume a separation of church and state.  But this is a very western notion based on Jesus Christ’s order to “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21).  Muhammed, the founder of Islam, was both a political, religious leader, and a warlord.  Islam has no separation of church and state or mosque and state.  In order for us to properly enforce FARA we must recognize that Islam is both a religious and a political system.

Two pieces of evidence underlay this contention.  The first is the existence of Sharia courts.  Sharia courts are Islamic religious courts.  In Islamic jurisprudence, they decide civil as well as religious disputes.  So when advancing Islam, foreign agents are also advancing a legal system.  This proves that Islam is inherently political. Secondly, we must know that Islam is an expansive political system. Much like NAZI and Communist systems, we must recognize it as a competing aggressor.  As evidence, we should remember that Islam nearly conquered Spain and Eastern Europe.  They were only stopped from taking all of Europe by defensive military action.  The very existence of the large “Muslim world” is evidence of successful military expansion.

The proposed mosque at Ground Zero of the 9 – 11 attacks is to be named “Cordoba House.”  Cordoba was the capital of Spain under Muslim domination.  This is an overt reference to a desire to re-establish hegemony over western lands.  The fact that it is at the site of an Islamic attack on our greatest symbols of economic and military might, confirms this assertion.  Multiculturalism tells us that we have no core culture.  Furthermore its directive to “celebrate diversity” assumes that no cultures are aggressive or un-American or anti-western.  We must take a culturist point of view that recognizes cultural diversity and competition.  We, the West, have a non-Islamic culture to protect and a right to protect it from aggressors.  We need to replace the multicultural point of view with a culturist point of view.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the head of the effort to build a mosque at Ground Zero.  He refuses to say where the $100 million for the mosque’s construction is coming from.  We can only speculate that it must derive from Malaysia or Saudi Arabia. Were a brave politician to demand it, we could force him to register Imam Rauf as a foreign agent under FARA.  This would mean that his books would be open and he would have to label his mosque as propaganda!  Strengthened, FARA could then be used to forbid the mosque and the Saudi’s relentless building of mosques across America.  The New York Post reports that the Kuwaiti born Rauf who is based in Malaysia has ties to the flotilla of jihadis that caused conflict with Israel.[vii]  He provides a fantastic opportunity for a culturist application of FARA.

We need to reverse our multicultural blindness to cultures in general, we need to take a culturist approach to Islam and recognize it as a hostile political system.  From this vantage point we need to get disclosure from the Islamic propagandist Imam Rauf under FARA in order to stop the travesty of a mosque being built at Ground Zero.

Dr. John K. Press is the author of Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future.  www.culturism.us has more information on culturism.

---

[i] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act

[ii] http://cairunmasked.org/?page_id=6

[iii] http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/department-justice-asked-regulate-aipac-foreign-agent-israeli-government/

[iv] http://cairunmasked.org/?page_id=6

[v] http://www.justice.gov/criminal/fara/

[vi] http://cairunmasked.org/?page_id=6

[vii] http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/imam_unmosqued_0XbZMwCvHAVdRZEKgx29AK

Simon Deng - Culturist or Racist??

Simon Deng was a featured speaker at the rally to STOP THE 9 - 11 MOSQUE.  
After he spoke to a reporter and I recorded it.  
I think he is a rival to PAT CONDELL !!

Culturist 9 - 11 Ground Zero "Cordoba House" Mosque Protest Video

On May 25th, 2010 we battled with the Lower Manhattan, Community Board 1 meeting over the building of a Mega - Mosque at Ground Zero ! What our speakers and the commission failed to recognize is that Islam is not just another benign multicultural reason to celebrate diversity. This mosque is a flag of conquest. It is an insult added to injury. It will stir pride in Jihadis all over the world.

Culturist History Lessons for Racist Historians

Was Manifest Destiny good? Manifest Destiny was the 19th century belief that the then Eastern bound United States was destined to expand to the west coast. Coined in 1836, the phrase and idea of Manifest Destiny was used to justify the annexation of the nation of Texas and the Mexican - American War from which Mexico ceded much of the US’s current southwestern land. This expansionist point of view’s merit rests on the assumption that the spread of American values meant the betterment of humanity.

Today historians many denounce Manifest Destiny as a racist forerunner of imperialism. These historian's racist interpretation lays on a failure to understand how importantly our forerunners took culture. Conflating culture and race causes today’s historians to misunderstand their subjects and seriously distorts America’s sense of self. Racist historians should consider the culturist historical perspective.

Manifest Destiny rested on assumptions that race-obsessed academia finds completely taboo. For example, believers in manifest destiny assumed that our republican form of government, in which people governed themselves, individually and collectively, was very special. People of the time contrasted our way with monarchy in which others governed you.

Less PC yet, it was held that this expansion of republicanism under the banner of Manifest Destiny had to have, in the parlance of the time, Anglo-Saxon roots. Those who formulated Manifest Destiny thought republican government required a culture of rational machismo, a love of work and self-government, an active stance towards taking one’s destiny into their own hands, only found in the cultural descendants of the Germanic tribes who conquered England. Therefore, the Anglo – Americans, and not the Mexicans, had to populate the remaining continental territory for republicanism to spread.

Up until and during the time of Manifest Destiny nearly all of the world, and indeed Mexico, had been impoverished and despotic. Had there not been America inventing electricity, fomenting industry, and developing the idea of democracy, Mexico would undoubtedly still be medieval. And, had Mexico controlled and populated Texas and the Southwest of America, there is absolutely no reason to believe that these areas would be different than the rest of Mexico. In other words, the spread of Anglo – American culture from sea to shining sea did enlarge the area of the world that was wealthy, democratic, rights recognizing, religiously free, and with free speech.

Read more »

The Armenian Genocide and Culturism

Obama's not wanting to acknowledge the Armenian genocide and his willingness to discuss western transgressions shows his poor grasp of culturist realities.

www.culturism.us

Haiti, Culturism, and the Basis of Rights

In a prior post, I used the moving of Sheik Khalid Mohammed’s trial from downtown NYC to illustrate some culturist principles. That rights come from cultures that can afford them and believe in them was my main point. Mohammed’s right to have a trial will disrupt the lives of whomever it comes near and will cost lots of money. Like rights, as many know and only some suspect, money is not metaphysical. We cannot just print more and have it hold value. The 200 million a year we spend assuring Mohammed gets his rights must come at the expense of services many American’s also assume they have a right to.

In comments, some serious objections to this foundational culturist philosophical tenet were raised. One set of comments claimed, “Rights that are the result of cost/risk-benefit are not rights at all. They are mere luxuries.

We have our rights, which do exist a priori even to many Atheists, because we fought for them.” Another commentator found our rights existed in our “potential to rise up and throw off our oppressors.” While insisting that we had a choice as to how many rights to give Mohammed, both correspondents worried that a lack of grounding in “potential” or “God” laid us dangerously close to moral relativism and a Nietzschean will to power model.

Haiti’s recent disastrous earthquake shows that rights do not exist independently of man’s belief and ability to afford them. As of the morning of January 31st, 2010 America has suspended evacuating critically injured Haitians to the US for care. Our issue? Cost. Florida’s health care system was reported to be, “quickly reaching saturation” and was “already under strain because of the winter influx of elderly people.” Even if those Haitians doomed to die think that God has given them the right to live, they will find out that that right has very little importance here on the earth.(1)

Secondly, the title of the article that announces our suspending the airlifts reads, “Haiti patients ‘will die’ because of US airlift halt.” Proximity is a factor, but I do not believe it is the reason the whole of the responsibility falls on the shoulders of the US. China and Saudi Arabia simply do not care about people outside of their realm. They believe in their people’s rights, not human rights. Yet, ironically, we get the blame for not helping!! Again, rights, - and in this case the most basic right there is, the right to have your life saved - only come from nations that believe in them. Rights do not come universal precepts.

To protect rights we must make sure the West is solvent. If we can afford to save Haitians and give terrorist rights, that is groovy. But, ultimately, our duty is to keep our nation alive so that our vision of rights can survive. Outside of the West, there is no sustained, solvent tradition of rights. If the West falls, the right to be rescued, let alone vote, will die. Ask yourself which nation will bring them to us? In a meaningless and abstract way the “right” to a full trial and be airlifted to a hospital may continue. But, I do not see Saudi Arabia granting you either. Rights only come from nations, like ours, that believe in them. If we do not appreciate right’s geo-political basis we will likely fail to adequately appreciate the need to protect our interests.

Does that throw us open to cultural relativism? NO! Just as China and Saudi Arabia believe in and protect their way of life and beliefs for their people, we must do the same for our people. Our values meant that we cannot just start to silence or kill people here or abroad without qualms. We have a very firm domestic tradition of rights, democracy, and freedom of speech that would make such abuses appear starkly wrong to us. Socrates and Jefferson would call us traitors to our ancestors if we were needlessly violent or dismissive of rights. Christ would haunt us if we did not respect the individual. But, we must be clear that other nations celebrate conquest, submission, and enslavement. Rather than cultural relativists, recognizing that rights are only western and dependent on our solvency makes us more appreciative of their fragility and the need to realistically protect them.

(1) BBC News, Haiti patients ‘will die’ because of US airlift halt, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8489392.stm, January 31, 2010

Fight multiculturalism, spread the words culturism and culturist

The West is officially dedicated to blindly increasing diversity. And when we complain about it, multiculturalists call us racist. This works. We remain, at best, marginal in the public discourse.

Rather than just defensively proclaiming we are not racist, we should go on the offensive by using the words culturism and culturists every single day. If we do not use them, the silent majority will remain afraid to speak. Our views will never get aired.

Be aggressive, spread our agenda, arm the public, use the words culturism and culturist today!!

www.culturism.us

Culturist Economics

Culturism and economics intersect at several places. In fact, our culture has been very important to our economic development. And, a strong economy is important to our culture. We as a society are paying for our lack of culturist thought. Immigration and globalization are driven by multiculturalism. We must again become culturist to undo their damage.

Dropping out of school early and having several children is a formula for personal poverty. Statistics show that this is a cultural distinction of many cultures. In many cultures women are expected to do this. And, shy of that, there is no shame in it. In their home countries, such people are poor. In the first world West they lean on our social services. When you combine this fact with not having ever paid taxes, you have the perfect storm for the creation of a second or third world economy.

Welfare is cultural. All laws are culturist. Welfare only works if people are ashamed to take it. Once everyone thinks it is okay to take it, you get more people taking from the system than paying into it. Without a sense of responsibility and shame, welfare is unsustainable. Laws are culturist in that if you get rid of value judgments and encourage people to take free lunches you sap initiative and responsibility. Culture and social services are intimately intertwined.

We are now at the point where people think that handouts are a right. They do not beg with shame; they demand with all their self-worth. Notice that these attitudes towards social services result from ideas; they are cultural. One is based on Marxist thought that the rich are holding the wealth and we deserve ours. The other comes from the republican capitalist view that wealth comes from generating services or products. We need to teach about the ravages of communism and dangers of demagoguery.

Culturist problems do not only lay with the poor. The business class have taken our manufacturing industries and shipped them overseas. This reflects globalist thinking. And this, like multiculturalism, stems from an inability to realize that we have a culture, a side, to be loyal to. This, in turn, has a double effect in that the understanding of factories and how things are made is also goes overseas with the factory; the idea of starting a machine shop to make a part your factory needs disappears. Thus businessmen’s lack of attachment to our nation has undermined our economy. On this note they also do not seem to mind Sharia financing. They think they are post-modern, post-cultural beings. This is a dangerous fallacy.

Teaching American history is important to the economy. The Founding Fathers spoke often about the importance of self-reliance and the unique nature of our culture. Teaching about western civilization is important. When you do so you realize that cultivating our commitment to the individual took a long historical struggle. Businessmen need to be loyal to the West. Economics must be taught. We have forgotten that Keynesian stimulus requires local factories to be stimulated by purchases. We now are only stimulating China. And economics and history intertwine in the lessons about the evils of communism. A functioning economy requires basic cultural precepts. We need to teach our basic cultural precepts again.

A combination of multiculturalism and globalism has undermined our ability to teach about the importance of culture to an economy. Since multiculturalism teaches that all cultures are equally wonderful and businessmen have no side to be loyal to, we can no longer, as we used to, discuss the intersection of values and economics. This is dangerous. Economics undergird our being the land of opportunity. If the West falls our vision will fall with it. We are not the world. We have nowhere else to live. We are the West. Sustaining the West and its vision requires a realistic sense of responsibility towards it. It requires a sense of culturism.

www.culturism.us